Skip to main content

tv   The Ed Show  MSNBC  December 24, 2010 4:00am-5:00am EST

4:00 am
stores and in school. and at church. everywhere we went, there were presents and even was making christmas for us. when you get older, you realize it's people like you who make christmases and the grown-ups do the most to make it christmas. i'm so lucky because my queen makes a great christmas. merry christmas tonight to everybody who watches "hardball." that's "hardball" for tonight. good evening, america, welcome to "the ed show." i'm in for ed schultz. obama is in ohio after getting some legislation passed, but look out. there's some serious danger ahead. i think that the democratic parties are as dead as they can be as of january. and the republicans will be to blame.
4:01 am
and newt gingrich's just getting more and more crazy as time passes. the gingrich who stole christmas blames the unemployed for the bad economy and the lack of jobs, and it looks like sarah palin's gearing up for a presidential run, but that doesn't scare obama supporter, oprah winfrey. wait until you hear how the queen of daytime insulted the queen of clown-time. but we start tonight with danger ahead for the democrats. after what was considered legislative victories in the lame-duck session, the president seemed hopeful yesterday. he got the s.t.a.r.t. treaty passed, the 9/11 responders act passed, and he got don't ask, don't tell repealed. to me those all no-brainer, incredibly easy victories with 80 pfrts country behind him but the way that the washington media scored it, they were major accomplishments but look credit is where credit is due. at least he got them passed i'll take it. now it would had been a disaster for he hadn't because he's about to run into a brick wall in the form of the republican house starting next year.
4:02 am
he claims he's still hopeful for more bipartisan agreements. >> it's time to find common ground on challenges facing our country. that's a message that i will take to heart in the new year. and i hope my democratic and republican friends will do the same. if there's any lesson to draw from these past few weeks, that's we are not doomed to endless gridlock. >> all right, the guy is continually hopeful on bipartisanship but when you listen to the republican leadership in the senate you realize how naive that sounds. just in week senator mitch mcconnell put out this threat to the democrats. quote, there's much for them to be angst-ridden about. they think it's bad wait till next year. now does that sound like someone who wants to work for the president? if obama hopes for compromise, obviously the republicans don't see similarly inclined. boehner flat out said it,
4:03 am
listen. >> i am not going to compromise on my principles nor am i going to compromise the will of the american people. >> come on, how stark are those differences? so what happens in a political environment where one side says they will never budge and the other side says, they can't wait to budge. well, i will tell you what will happen. the side that's willing to compromise is the one that is going to be doing all of the compromising. this is simple, basic, irrefutable logic, so i hate to break it to you, unless something notably, president obama's attitude, most of all changes, all of the democratic priorities are now dead. it turns out that the obama administration lasted two years. who in their right mind thinks that the republican-controlled house will agree to any of the democratic priorities?
4:04 am
but that doesn't mean that no legislation will pass in the next two years. it just mean only republican priorities will be considered. so you will start to hear a lot about cutting spending and making sure the balance budget passed and although just blew a $ $850 billion hole. talking about cutting social security, that'll be on the block and so are other ways of cutting programs aimed to help the middle class now that the rich have already don't get their payday through the tax cuts. now that sounds pretty disastrous, right? but it doesn't have to be that way. we can do something different and that could be that the president can choose to do something else. although it seems to be against his core nature, he could fight back. as congressman wiener's pointed out recently, votes are not static. they can be changed through political pressure. the one way of hope is the dream act. look it failed to pass recently but president promises to make a big issue out of it in the next two years, why? i thought he said if he doesn't have the votes for something, then that issue is over. that's always what he says. well, honestly on this one, he's
4:05 am
going to fight because he really needs those latino votes in 2010. remember, he is a politician, after all. but this can turn out to be something great for those of us who think he should fight harder for the middle class. why? cause he might exactlyaed win. i don't think that he expects to win on this, but -- and i think that he's doing it as a matter of politics, but i'll tell you, starting to apply political pressure, he might be surprised at how quickly the republicans buckle. you know why? because they also need those latino votes. so my hope for the next year is that the president accidentally teaches him a lesson he didn't expect. that if he fights on any given issue he may actually change those votes he previously thought were unchangeable and that the path in achieving democratic and middle class priorities is not through constant compromise and capitulation but through an
4:06 am
aggressive battle where you take the fight to the enemy. how's that for an ironic bit of hope? all right, and now get your cell phones out. i want to know what you think. tonight's text survey is, do you think president obama will fight republicans harder in 2012? text "a" for yes, text "b" for no to 622639. and of course, i will read those survey results later in the show for you. joining me now for a different point of view is former congressman harold ford jr. a political analyst for nbc news. welcome. >> good to see you, merry christmas to you. >> now i know that you don't -- >> oh, merry christmas to you too. i know that you don't necessarily agree that some of these compromises were so bad. you kind of like the tax cut deal, right? >> well, i think in light of what happened in early november, as you recall and we both know, our party or my partien i assume your party as well took in the president's words a shellacking. the deal that was struck around taxes we got just about everything that we wanted except an extensions of the tax cuts for the wealthiest americans. we enjoyed a new tax cut, a payroll tax cut and a 13-month
4:07 am
extension, as you know, for unemployment benefits. in addition, the cuts that the president wanted around, accelerating business tax breaks, all will hopefully stimulate job creation and give -- and give big business and small business in in country some sort of stability in the sense of certainty. so i think that deal was a good one. deals by nature, as we always know isn't always what we want or nor do they reflect the purity of our designs but i think that real leadership is when you enter into a room where someone may not agree with you and get the absolute best deal that you can and as much as i respect anthony wiener and respect yournoint quoting him, i dare to say, in light of 60-plus seat loss in the house, a six-seat loss in the senate november, i think that this is a darn good deal and the president has every right to be proud of it and should brag about it.
4:08 am
>> okay, let's focus on that for a second seen in sure. >> look, when he passed payroll tax that i think a great majority of americans would had been in favor of that. he viewed that as a victory for himself. he passed the unemployment extension which i think that an overwhelming majority of americans would have agreed with. dream act, 80% of americans. s.t.a.r.t. treaty nearly everyone in the country agreed with it and finally the 9/11 responders bill. my god other than a couple of republican senators you couldn't find anyone who would disagree that so are those the great compromises that he got for blowing an $850 billion hole in the deficit through gigantic tax cuts? on. >> look the majority of americans support it or the deal, or the compromise, that was reached by the president by republicans and democrats in congress. a majority of americans believe that government should work and must work and they support the idea in the concept of what has happened now to your point about the three other significant pieces of legislations -- legislation, don't ask, don't tell, the dream act, i wish it passed. it this is have part. the brilliant part of your intro, the president, i wouldn't say accidentally get the dream
4:09 am
act passed, i think that they'll get it passed because of the politics of the matter, both democrats and republican want as many hispanic votes heading into the election cycle. if everybody was so easy all of these accomplishments over the last three weeks, if they were as easy as you suggest or as minor as you suggest, how come the democratic congress over the last two years couldn't win for us new yorkers here on the 9/11 compensation fund? how come we couldn't get don't ask, don't tell passed before? why is it at the beginning of this congress, we couldn't have gotten an extensions, or should say a new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. remember just two weeks ago, jon kyl said that he would not support the s.t.a.r.t. treaty. mitch mcconnell went on one of the national tv shows on "meet the press with david gregory" and said that he would not support it. here we are the president wins their support by a wide margin of senators and we now have a new s.t.a.r.t. treaty.
4:10 am
i think it is critical in face of some of the wikileak disclosures and the president made a promise to the russian leadership that we would get this done. >> all right, congressman, first of all, you know, i was asking the same exact questions you are. why can't a democratic congress do the simplest things until jon stewart pressures them on the 9/11 responders bill, i thought that was amazing. so i often feel that frustration. but let's turn to the next two years, right? >> right. >> now do you really think that we can get democratic priorities through with the idea of compromise? because i mean, you've seen those clips and you have seen the republicans over and over. it doesn't look like they have any intention of compromising whatsoever. >> i think that the president has a unique chance to divide a big part of the republican party. you and i know that the tea party, for better or worse,
4:11 am
animated and colored the political psych thel last go round. i think that there are some in the tea party who are genuine to the notion and are true to the notion that reducing spending and reducing our national debt should be the priority of congress. the president, i think, had a good set of recommendations laid out by his debt commission. if he's able to pick and choose the best ideas in the debt commission, cobble that into a plan and try his hardest to win democratic and republicans' support i think that he can actually score a victory there. now you and i may disagree on the social security cut, or other entitlement cuts, but i think if this was an easy question about how you balance the budget and lower the long-term debt, we wouldn't -- you and i wouldn't be having this conversation, congress would have passed it, and there would be no debate about it. the reality is this is a tough question. >> of course -- no, but listen, that's not -- my ideal world, that's not a win for progressives, it's not a win for democrats to get a cut based on social security cuts, based on cuts on the middle class when we just passed a giant tax cut for the rich. why do we do that, and then
4:12 am
we'll turn around and say oh, it's time to reduce the deficit and we're going do it on the back of the democrats. that's not a win. >> the wealthiest of american, those who earn over $1 million a year will likely not see social security until they're 70 and would have reduced benefits under the plan that was outlined by the deficit commission. but, look, the details of this could be worked out. i don't think that there is any doubt that there's a better way to do entitlement reform, than perhaps paul ryan and some of the others have proposed. as a matter of fact, i don't think that there is any doubt about that, but to suggest that we are not going to have to make some sacrifice, upper class and upper income americans. and in fact some of them may have to forfeit their security for those who are in the top 1.1% of earners in the country, so i don't disagree with you there but i think for the president to be successful over the next two years, the model that he's pursued in the last two to three weeks is a model that he'll have to pursue going forward. there will have to be some compromise.
4:13 am
painful tom watch my colleague/friend john boehner. compromise is how you get things done in washington. it's not a bad word and you can only hope that president obama can win for democrats and for the country like he did when he struck, i think, i still believe, a terrific deal on taxes, on tax cuts for all americans. >> i think congressman boehner is fully aware of what he says and what he means when he says he's not willing to compromise, but listen, we differ on how we want to get things done, but we hope some of the same things do get done, for example later in the show i'll talk about how i think that the president can win the dream act. but thanks so much for joining us. >> you laid it out i think in your intro, is the way that the president and the white house should follow and i hope that they're watching and i hope they adopt a measure -- or i should say the approach that you outlined earlier. >> see, another thing we agree on. >> merry christmas to you. >> i hope that they're watching too. >> happy holidays. >> thank you, you too. all right, coming up, president obama's basquing in the glow of his big wins but so are the bankers on wall street.
4:14 am
they got huge breaks when they didn't need any. we'll talk about how the president can focus on the middle class instead when we come back. and crazy teleevangelist. pat robertson is acting like a conservative. i'll play you the tape. and plus fox news blames the nba for a war on christmas. sarah palin takes aim at rudolph. don't do it, sarah. and lizz winstead roasts tom cofwhurn "club ed." you're watching "the ed show" on msnbc. coming up, president obama. wants to keep the dream alive for millions of children in ♪ holy night ♪ sleep in heavenly peace ♪ sleep in heavenly peace ♪ sleep in heavenly peace
4:15 am
♪ sleep in heavenly peace coming up, president obama. wants to keep the dream alive for millions of children in america who are living in fear. he's vowing to make immigration reform his top priority next year. i think that he might be doing it for politics but we'll talk about how he can break the republicans back on it anyway. maria thereskumar, executive director of vote for latino sounds off next.
4:16 am
4:17 am
4:18 am
i am very disappointed congress wasn't able to pass the dream act so we can stop punishing kids for the actions of their parents and allow them to serve in the military or earn an education and contribute their talents to the country where they grew up. i'm going to go back at it. and i'm going to engage in republicans who -- i think some of them in their heart of hearts know that it's the right thing to do, but they think the politics is tough for them. i am persistent. if i believe in something strongly, i stay on it. and i believe strongly in this.
4:19 am
>> all right, president obama might claim to be persistent but is this all smoke and mirrors? if he wouldn't get the dream act through congress with a democratic house and senate, if he pursues the same strategy, he's definitely not going to get it through the new tea party-saturated congress. even republicans who used to support the dream act, have flipped on it. like senate orrin hatch of utah. he originally sponsored the act and as recently as july of this year, he praised it at a town hall meeting. >> if you're going to it's dream act, a lost these kids are brought in as infants. they don't even know that they're not citizens until they have graduated from high school and if they have lived good lives and done good things why would we penalize them and not let them go to school? >> that was this year, but now hatch has done a complete 180. two days ago, he said the bill was just a way for democrats to appeal to their, quote, far left political constituencies. so what happened since this summer? hatch is now a potential tea party challenger in 2012. of course.
4:20 am
and he doesn't want to be taken out in the primary. that's what happened to his colleague from utah, senator bob bennet earlier this year. obama won't get the dream act through congress with guys like hatch in the way with you about an increasing latino population it might not be bad fight politically for the president if he wants to win in 2012, and if he does it right he might even be able to get the republicans to bend to his will. now to help us explain how, let me bring in maria teresa kumar, msnbc contributor and executive director of votto latino. all right, first, is obama right about this fight on the dream act? does it make sense for him politically? >> well, welcome to the 2012 presidential elections. it's starting. he kicked it off with the dream act. recognizing as you just mentioned that we just found from the census is that you have a huge percentage of population growth in the latino community and you're going to see big, huge redistricting, in texas alone we expect four new seats.
4:21 am
in those four seats two them will be latino. the same thing in south carolina, utah. you go down the list. so what obama is trying to do strategically is he wants it fronted and center and the republicans in order to make sure they get the latino voter,ch voter, eventually. to win a presidential and to capture the prize. they're going to have to figure out how to be nice to the latino community and what was surprising, though, was that we did have -- you mentioned orrin hatch and we also had senator snowe and senator collins who have both been very sympathetic to the dream act. and so what we need to do is take a step back, and say, well, what made obama move -- you know the conversation forward? and one was a very aggressive grassroots campaign. and i think what you're going to see is that you're going to see a lot of these organizations take their gloves off and start targeting these members of congress, and saying you know what, we have a shot. >> but, maria, we've had huge grassroots campaigns on other issues, whether it was the public option, whether it was you know, you name it, and it
4:22 am
never moved the president and as soon as the republicans said they were going to vote, no he threw up his hands. what can i do? i don't have the votes. >> don't forget, don't ask, don't tell, that was exactly what -- i mean, don't ask, don't tell was dead in the water until about two weeks ago, and all of a sudden a -- >> i don't believe that. >> i do. no from internal, even the white house was surprised and one of the reasons is that you have impressively grassroots movement and you had to find a way for the president to figure out what are my easy wins? and you are right, part of it was, you had incredible pressure within the pentagon saying we don't want the course to decide this, we want us to decide this on how to make that transition but you did have incredible grassroots movement and this is a nascent movement that started two, three years ago with the dream act and you're seeing these kids getting more and more sophisticated. for the very first time evangelical folks on the right saying that we are to pass it, that's incredible pressure.
4:23 am
>> yeah, look i'll tell you, i don't believe it. every show that i have hosted, whether here or on the young turks i always say, don't ask, don't tell will definitely pass. because look, 80% of the country's in favor of it. two-thirds of the troops here in favor it, the pentagon is in favor. how inept as a politician do you have to be to not get that passed? i knew it. look, everybody who was falling knew it was going to pass. he's doing here. he's doing it because -- not because he thinks that he's going to win, but he's doing it for the votes so that he can turn around and quality grassrootancy say, hey, latinos i'm on your side, right. >> i don't disagree with you. thef but conversely, the latino groups and advocates that are also participating -- they actually agree with the dream act are starting to galvanize and say, okay, mr. president, you just said that this is a top priority, we'll make sure that it's a top priority front and center. look, 60% of americans, both
4:24 am
independent and progressive leaning, actuallygree with the dream act and the more that people start to learn the details of the dream act is, the more that the american public is convinced that it's the right thing to do. >> all right, so let's go back of how to get it passed, right? and it involves putting pressure on the republicans. how do you do that? because a guy like hatch and lindsay graham are not going to be able to move. but there are a lot of republicans who can be moved, right? >> right. >> who are they, and do you think if you put enough pressure on them, they get worried that they'll lose the latino vote and they flip, do you think that that can happen and who are they. >> i think we do. first of all you have kay bailey hutchison who is right now the senator from texas, she wantless the governorship. and even governor perry is for the dream act and he actually believes -- he's actually against sb-1070 the arizona law basically doing racial profiling for immigration, so if she has a contender and ever wants that governorship, she has to make sure that she's courts her base which is the same time of the
4:25 am
latino vote. and you also also have senator collins and snowe from maine who have a lot less to lose baugh they don't have a large latino population. they've demonstrated much more liberal -- i should say moderate, than the rest of the republican party. and now you have the new independent senator from alaska, murkowski, who also is saying, you know, this is something that's reasonable and again i don't have that much to you lose if i actually vote for the president. so those are four votes right there the and the last one, that's a little up for grabs, so still trying to figure out who that person would be, again they just need five votes right now. >> right, that's true. all they also now need the house. so they're in a little bit of trouble over there. >> not have a but i think that strategy can still work. maria, thanks so much for coming on and discussing it with us. i really appreciate it. >> thanks so much, jenk. >> coming up the crew over on fox are expanding their war on christmas and now they're bashing the nba. and is the nfl committing the same crime in their eyes? they're in "zone" next. how does vanishing deductible work ?
4:26 am
that boulder is like your insurance deductible. big, always hanging over your head. but, vanishing deductible from nationwide insurance takes $100 off your deductible every year you're a safe driver, until... amazing ! you saved me ! oh it was just an analogy. but you're welcome, you're welcome. ♪ nationwide is on your side that's very good.
4:27 am
4:28 am
4:29 am
in "psycho talk" tonight, every december, fox news likes to bring a up to of holiday fear to their viewers with endless coverage of the completely bogus war on christmas. this year was no exception. >> our democrats are waging war on christmas to make sure that santa delivers everything on their wish list. >> is harry reid a grinch. >> well how about no, no, no. >> when it comes to mentioning jesus on christmas coverage. >> a topic of national controversy and that's because of of the word christmas has been removed from the title. >> christmas is a federal holiday, it's not like just could pretend it doesn't even happen. >> take await nativity scene and now take away red and green? it's crazy. >> their brand of crazies are endless and today our right wing friends have found war on christmas, basketball.
4:30 am
just posted a story with in headline. "the nba's war on christmas?" the story attacks the nba for scheduling five games on christmas day. news flash for fox, the world doesn't stop turning just because it's christmas. you know who else works on christmas? cops, firefighters, doctors, priests, are they all part of the war on christmas? did you than nba teams have played on christmas day since 1949. this has apparently been a very long war on christmas. one particular team, the los angeles lakers, have played on christmas day 36 times including the last 11 years. does that make kobe bryant the most sacrilegious man in america? and it's not just basketball. the dallas cowboys are playing this christmas. could america's team be waging a war on christmas as well? and incidentally, 66 nba games tipped off during hanukkah this year.
4:31 am
i didn't hear fox news complaining about those. let alone how many games were played during ramadan. my sense is that fox might not mind a war on ramadan quite as much. this fox news obsession with a nonexistent war on christmas is the very merry psycho talk. all right now, coming up, newt gingrich is taking a page right out of the republican playbook and blaming victims. yep, he's blaming all of the problems in this country on the unemployed. my commentary on him coming up. and what happened to the so-called maverick? john mccain is off the deep end lately and a new report reveals, he's still angry and bitter over his big 2008 loss. i'll get rapid-fire response on that. plus, pat robertson stirs the pot. steven spielberg says no to nancy pelosi. and "daily show" co-creator lizz winstead is talking about obama's vacation.
4:32 am
4:33 am
4:34 am
4:35 am
welcome back to "the ed show." i'm in for ed schultz and now for the battleground story tonight. president obama has signed a lot of legislation recently, but the major problems in this country remain unresolved. the unemployment rate has been near 10% all year. but guys on wall street who cause the recession just keep getting richer. they're set to take home record profits again in year. and it's not going to get any better if the republicans have anything to say about it. potentially presidential candidate and bad guy extraordinaire newt gingrich went down to south carolina, and blamed the unemployed for america's problems. yes, he's actually blaming the unemployed. he said that the country spent $134 billion on unemployment compensation, and, quote, got nothing for it. by which he means, of course, his rich friends got nothing for it. he also said the government shouldn't be wasting money,
4:36 am
quote, paying people to do nothing for 99 weeks and while newt is blaming the victims of this recession, his republican colleagues just broke off from the fiscal crisis inquiry commission and wrote a report of their own on what caused the crash on wall street and you'll love this part. they refuse to even put the phrase wall street in the report. it was an effort to deflect blame from their banker donors and put it on the government and the poor. but the democrats need to share in the blame, too. time and time again, the obama administration has failed to crackdown on wall street. in fact, he just had a meeting with the top ceos in the country to ask them what he could do for them, again. joining me now is brent badowski a columnist for "the hill" newspaper. it appears that first of all fighting are if the middle class and not constantly appeasing the bankers would be the most obvious political strategy of all-time, so why doesn't the president do that? >> well, i think that you're going to see a lot more of that, when we have a republican house
4:37 am
and the new congress comes back. what newt gingrich needs to do and our friends at fox news need to do as well is spend christmas each turning on and be seen and watching "it's a wonderful life," where jamie stewart and that great frank capper movie with the big small time bang kers. and he was up against mr. potter the crooked banker who was trying to rip everybody out and put stewart out of business. that's real america, the jimmy stewart america. that ought to be our america. that ought to be what we're fighting for and i think when the congress comes back, the president is on a roll, there's no question about that. her ay reid and the democrats in congress are on a roll. they have a new fighting spirit that i think came out of the last election. and what we need to do is to reclaim christmas. reclaim jesus. jesus said, cenk you should sell your possession to give the proceeds to the poor.
4:38 am
jesus said that the poors are blessed and that we should feed the hungry and clothe the needy. i don't need any right wingers from fox telling us, or newt gingrich, that christianity means letting people suffer for 99 weeks or more on unemployment. newt gingrich let's buy him a copy of the new testament and the sermon on the mount when we celebrate christmas. that's my christmas present to newt. if democrats make that case, we win. >> all right, well, you know that's a curious thing, brent, because you know i -- first of all, i think that they got their spiriting a little bit not fighting the republicans but fighting the president when he caved in on the republicans on that tax cut deal. that's where i sensed a little uprising the house on the democratic's side but let's s 's talk about why the republicans never pay that price. the middle class, the people who lost their jobs, shouldn't the democrats be able to punish the republicans for these, you know, points as you rightly point out, americans would be outraged by and how come they can't, it seems, for a long time. >> well, i think what i hope the
4:39 am
president does when they come back is take a look at ronald reagan's old playbook. reagan could play his part in politics and cut the deal at the same time but reagan had convictions and reagan went to the country with those convictions. i'd like to see the president say that it is a great moral issue for america that anybody's jobless at all for 99 weeks, i'd like to see democrats say, like frank capper said, that we should care for our neighbors, that we don't -- that we're not a country of mr. potters, people who pay themselves huge amounts of money and rip off the average american. i would like to see democrats talk about the sermon on the mount about helping the poor, feeding the hungry, clothing the needy, as jesus said, as we celebrate on christmas eve. as we're going to see on nbc with its "it's a wonderful life" again, we should paint the portrait of america that americans relate to and go to the country aggressively and boldly and say, no one in america should be jobless for 99 weeks and then left out in the cold. and if newt gingrich says otherwise, he doesn't know much about jesus, he doesn't know much america and the sermon on
4:40 am
the mount, if we make argument, we win. and i hope that the president does. there has to be a balance between reaching out for honorable republicans as a president and john kerry and dick lugar and harry reid did to get the s.t.a.r.t. treaty through, don't ask, don't tell. it was a really good week. the 9/11 heroes bill, these were victories we won but we have to fight and we have to talk to the people in ways they relate to. >> all right, well, it sounds like you're asking the democrats to be democrats, that seems to be a tall order but good luck with that. thanks for joining us. we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> all right. now let's get some rapid-fire response from our panel on these stories. what happened to john mccain? he's turned into a real curmudgeon. the daily beast reports that mccain still angry over his 2008 presidential loss. and here's voting against positions that he had supported earlier to spite the president and he was even overheard saying
4:41 am
it, why don't these pesky democratic kids get off of my lawn. okay he didn't say that but you get the point. steven spielberg's spokesman is denying a report saying that his client is advising nancy pelosi on how to rebrand the democratic party but he didn't actually deny the pelosi here, reached out to the director. drama. and it looks like sarah palin is gearing up air presidential run, but oprah isn't worried at all about her actually making it to the white house. all right with us tonight todd webster democratic strategist and former communication's director for tom daschle and ernest istook former republican congressman and fellow at the heritage foundation. mccain has flip-flopped on a lot of his positions. s.t.a.r.t. treaty you can argue. the dream act which he was happy to support before and this goes on. is this out of spite, is "the daily beast" right. >> well the "daily beast" is trying to do a little amateur psychoanalyst. i think that you could have a
4:42 am
good time saying that has obama changed political positions as well. >> when drift rightward and then the little choice of terms is to say -- >> really? >> -- they've grown in office but if they listen to what the electorate is saying and if they move to the right and then you know the media likes to say, my goodness, what's wrong with him? are they crazy? are they changing positions and so forth? the real problem here is that people want to applaud people if they drift leftward, but condemn them if they drift rightward. >> now, look, i think that -- >> a pretty simple equation. >> when is the last time that someone in washington drifted leftward? i don't know maybe we're seeing a different washington. todd go ahead. >> no, this is an issue of him drifting bitter and old and delusional. look, he's a patriot. he has sacrificed enormously for this country, and everybody is grateful for that, but i think that now in the twilight of his career, he can take one or two paths. a guy like senator ted kennedy who was, who was a liberal
4:43 am
democrat, but was agreeable, was willing to make compromises and get things done. he is the man who enabled the prescription drug benefit to get enacted with president bush. he's worked with senator hatch, the health care bill is really his legacy, but john mccain is becoming wiley lowman instead of an elder statesman. he's becoming delizational, bitter and feeling like life passed him by so hopefully over this christmas holiday he'll go back to arizona and sort of rethink things, because he has an opportunity to be an elder statesman, to be an elder leader in his party, and to get things done in the senate, and i think that's what he should be thinking about for his legacy. >> you can't split and not say that john mccain didn't get affected by the right-wing challenge that he got in the primary. i mean you can see for yourself, right? the he has drifted way, way to the right from where he used to be. >> in particular the people of arizona and around the country as well. he found doing things that were
4:44 am
out of touch with the people who were electing him and to his credit, he changed positions to reflect what the people were saying. >> all right, now let's go on a nancy pelosi -- pelosi apparently reached out to steven spielberg. there's some denials going on about what happened there. but todd, doesn't she have to do work on rebranding here? given the losses that happened. and is it senseible to reach out to to a movie director? >> i think that suffering some of the losses that we did, it's a markup strength to go and get advice on a wide range of perspectives and counselors on what to do going forward. what i have great admiration for in my republican friends is their ability to stay on message to parrot talking points delivered to them by their message guru. a guy named frank luntz for 20 years has been helping, focus grouping republican policies to sell unpopular policies to unsuspecting constituents so i
4:45 am
salute my republican friends for their ability to stay on message and be disciplined and to parrot what frank tells them. i wish that democrats from a p.r. standpoint to be able to have that same message. >> congressman? >> if frank capper were around today i think that he'd enjoy steven spielberg's movies. budowsky was talking about that before. putting his pulse on the american people at reflect things that people enjoy. and you know, trying to do another makeover for speaker pelosi and such, they tried the democratic party makeover in 2006 say ago. >> the democratic party. >> -- trying to reduce deficits and pay more attention to more responsible governance, it worked for them in the elections of 2006 when they won the majority in the house and the senate, but once people found out the difference between the hollywood presentation they were making and what they were actually doing in office, they
4:46 am
got turned out in 2010. i'm not saying the republicans have a great reputation right now, okay? but the democrats have the worst and they need that makeover. >> all right, now we -- we're running short on time. let me give you the guyf guys the oprah quote real quick and your quick response to it. here's what she says on sarah palin, it does not scare me because when asked whether she was going to win for president and win, it does not scare me because i believe in the intelligence of the american public. drums. okay, so what do you think congressman, is she right? are the american people smart enough not to elect sarah palin? >> read the entire quote from oprah. she said that sarah palin is charming and very likable. that her new tv show is -- is going great. so give the whole quote. oprah threw some bouquets at sarah palin as well as indicating that she disagrees with her politically. after all, oprah was a big supporter of barack obama. >> well, look, but let's -- >> all right, who else -- who else is charming and personable
4:47 am
and attractive and has got a great television presence? kim kardashian, but there is no reason why she should be elected the next president and i think that she has about as much choice of being elected president as does sthooip but don't give a one life sided aspect. >> all right, leave it right there. >> thanks, merry christmas. >> all right, leave it right there. >> merry christmas. >> thanks for giving us the full quote. thank you to both of you guys. merry christmas. >> thank you. all right, now coming up, this american soldier is accused of leaking classified information to wikileaks. but what he's going through in jail is sickening, un-american, and some thinks it's torture. the united nations is investigating. jane half or shierp founder of the website los angeles a petition to the commander to stop the mistreatment of manning. she stops off ahead. and sarah palin doesn't have a clue on how to shoot a caribou but she had no problem on firing off on rudolph the red-nosed reindeer. i have got the tape.
4:48 am
4:49 am
it's not too late to let me know what you think. tonight's text survey question is, do you think president obama will fight republicans harder in 2011?
4:50 am
4:51 am
welcome back to "the ed show" and in the "playbook" tonight private first class was arrested for allegedly arrested for leaking documents to wikileaks. what they're doing with him is spark outrage with human rights oerpgzs. for more on this, let's turn on to jane hampshire, founder of petitioned to stop the treatment of manning. jane, tell us what is going on with manning, how are they confine ing him. >> who wrote today about his trip to go visit manning in quantico last weekend and he's being held basically in isolation.
4:52 am
he's not allowed to have any newspapers to watch any news on tv. he doesn't have bedding. he was not allowed out of his cell except for very limited time. he can't exercise except for walking around in circles in chains and according to jeff kay who is a psychologist who also writes for us today who works with torture victims, he says this is how you break someone and this week in "the new york times" charlie savage says that the government is trying to break manning to get him to roll over on julian assange because they don't have enough evidence -- or manning without a confession. and so everybody's very concerned that manning -- the only evidence that's been provided against him has come from a guy named adrian lammo, a former hacker, who's story doesn't even match up with his own story. so there's something that's going to here. it's really wrong. and we want the brig commander to lift this stuff that's being done to him because hasn't been proven that he's done anything yet.
4:53 am
>> right, you know 23 hours in isolation, for people to understand how extreme that is, we don't do that to anyone outside of our most dangerous criminals, the guys that we have in supermax, the unibomber, the world trade center bombers, et cetera, et cetera. so this is really extreme and the guy hasn't been convicted or even tried so it's really strange but you know assange went further in that interview that i had with him and he said that manning might in his words, be a political prisoner. does that go too far or what's your thoughts on that, jane? >> no, i absolutely agree with that. look, the guy who's provided the only evidence against him, adrian lam owas in a mental institution, a forced institutionalization by the police two weeks before he said that he had these chats with manning, and the only proof they have is in these chat logs that manning turned over to "wire" magazine and to "washington post" back in may and now this week "the new york times" is publishing that oh manning suddenly remembers that in these chat logs that he -- actually a moment when there was a physical disc turned over from manning to
4:54 am
somebody from wikileaks. did "wire" and "washington post" not notice this in the chat logs? why did get the "new york times" gets the chat logs well because he says that his disk was seized by the fbi. who won a pulitzer prize. are they sitting on this story? it doesn't make any sense. adrian lammo's story doesn't even mix with the one -- mesh with the one that the military has. so you know, this is not enough to hold this guy with. >> right. >> all right. jane hamsher, thanks for joining us. it is a powerful story. now, coming up, "the daily show" co-creator lizz winstead is coming up in "club ed."
4:55 am
4:56 am
4:57 am
4:58 am
it's thursday on the christmas break starting for us tomorrow, it's time for a special edition of "club ed." with "daily show" co-creator lizz winstead. all right, lizz, pat robertson just said that we should legalize pot. since i agree with him, i believe that hell has frozen over. what do you make of robertson's statement? >> you know it's pretty incredible and when i read that, too, i was thinking, how awesome would it be if he decided to just to change the name of the 700 club to the 420 club? that would be my dream. just take it that much further. >> that's funny. that would be change that we could all believe in. >> exactly. >> obama's taken a -- they've taken a change. they've gone to hawaii on a vacation. what do you make of that? >> well, i hope that they're wrapping all of their gifts in his birth certificate and sending them back once and for all. i think that could the smartest thing they could do. a little holly around the date and send it off, and i'm from
4:59 am
minnesota, so when people travel to tropical places for christmas and i don't get it and did it last year and then that guy blew up his you know junk on a plane so i hope that nothing like that happens again. i'm a little nervous. >> right, well, he tried to blow up his junk. fortunately or unfortunately -- >> he singed, he singed his junk. an ill-fated junk attempt. i blew you off completely. >> -- >> all of the time. >> how about demint. speaking of junk, how about demint. >> whining about christmas? you know the whining is so insane that -- that you can take these extremes, you know first it's, i just want to go home for the holidays and then it's -- you know, i don't even understand how anybody can tolerate between he and coburn and you know it's maddening to me because coburn and the fact that it took him this long to understand the profondity for getting them for 9/11 and first responders and sensially he was the last responder and that's the last thing and he's a doctor, the guy is a ob/gyn basically putting the o in gyno. >> leave it right there, liz. >> putting no in gyno.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on